explanations of resistance to social influence Flashcards
Define what is meant by resisting to social influence.
Refers to the ability of people to withstand the social pressure to conform to the majority and to obey authority. This ability is influenced by both situational and dispositional factors.
Define what is meant by social support.
The presence of people who resist the pressures to conform or obey can help others to do the same. These people act as models to show others that resistance to social influence is possible.
Outline social support as a way of resisting conformity.
The pressure to conform can be resisted if there are other people present who are not conforming.
Asch (1956) found that a dissenter giving the correct answer reduced conformity rates from 32% to 5.5%.
The dissenter allows the naïve ptp to be free to follow their own conscience, acting as a ‘model’ of independent behaviour - showing that the majority is no longer unanimous.
Give an example of real world research support for social support as a way of resisting conformity.
One strength of social support as an explanation of how people resist social influence is research support for the positive effects of social support.
Albrecht et al (2006) evaluated Teen Fresh Start USA magazine, an eight week programme to help pregnant adolescents resist the peer pressure to smoke. Social support was provided by a slightly older ‘buddy’. At the end of the programme, adolescents with a ‘buddy’ were significantly less likely to smoke than a control group who didn’t have a ‘buddy’.
This shows that social support can help young people resist social influence as part of intervention in the real world, providing support for the theory.
Outline the role of social support in resisting obedience.
The pressure to obey can be resisted if there is another person who is seen to disobey.
In one of Milgram’s variations, the rate of obedience dropped from 65% to 10% when the genuine ptp was joined by a disobedient confederate. The disobedient model challenges the legitimacy of the authority figure, making it easier for others to obey.
Give an example of research support for social support as a way of resisting obedience.
A strength is research evidence to support the role of dissenting peers in resisting obedience.
Gamson et al (1982)’s ptps were told to produce evidence that would be used to help an oil company run a smear campaign.
The researchers found high levels of resistance in their study than Milgram did in his.
This was suggested to be because the ptps were in groups so they could discuss what they were told to do.
29 out of 33 groups of ptps rebelled against their orders.
This shows that peer support can lead to disobedience by undermining the legitimacy of an authority figure.
Evaluate the social support explanation in the context of resisting social influence.
A study by Allen and Levine (1971) showed that social support can help individuals to resist the influence of a group. In an Asch-type task, when the dissenter was someone with apparently good eyesight, 64% of genuine ptp refused to conform. When there was no supporter at all only 3% of ptps resisted.
This shows that having a social dissenter does reduce rate of conformity supporting the social support explanation.
However, when the dissenter had obviously poor eyesight (thick glasses) resistance was only 36%. This showed that social support doesn’t always help, limiting the support this research can give the theory thus reducing its validity.
Define locus of control (Julian Rotter, 1966).
Refers to the sense we each have about what directs events in our lives. It is a concept concerned with internal control versus external control. Internals believe they are mostly responsible for what happens to them. Externals believe it is a matter of luck or other outside forces.
What does it mean if someone has an internal LOC?
They believe that the things that happen to them are largely controlled by themselves. For example, if you do well in an exam it is because you worked hard and if you didn’t do well it is because you didn’t work hard.
What does it mean if someone has an external LOC?
Tend to believe the things that happen are outside of their control. For example, if they did well in an exam it was because they used an excellent textbook. If they failed they might blame it on the textbook or they had bad luck because the questions were hard.
Outline the LOC continuum.
People are not just either internal or external. LOC is a scale and individuals vary in their position on it. High internal is at one end, high external is at the other end.
Which end of the LOC is more likely to resist social influence? Describe why.
High external LOC are more able to resist social pressures to conform or obey. If a person takes personal responsibility for their actions and experiences (internal), they tend to base their decisions on their own beliefs rather than depending on the opinions of others.
Another explanation is that people with a high internal LOC tend to be more self-confident, more achievement-orientated and have higher intelligence. These traits lead to greater resistance to social influence.
Outline a strength of LOC as an explanation of resistance to social influence.
A strength is research evidence to support the link between LOC and resistance to obedience. Holland (1967) repeated Milgram’s baseline study and measured whether ptps were either internals or externals. He found that 37% of internals did not continue to the highest shock level (showed resistance), whereas only 23% externals didn’t continue. Internals showed greater resistance to authority in this Milgram-like situation. This shows that resistance is related to LOC, which increases the validity of LOC as an explanation.
However, 23% of externals did still show resistance, showing that the link between LOC and resistance is not very strong, and having an external LOC does not necessarily stop you being able to resist social influence. This suggests that LOC is not necessarily the most significant factor in being able to resist social influence and other factors such as social support or personality are also involved.
Outline a limitation of LOC as an explanation of resistance of social influence.
There is evidence to challenge the link between LOC and resistance. Twenge et al (2004) analysed data from American LOC studies conducted over a 40-year-period. The data showed that people, over time, became more resistant to obedience but also more external. If resistance is linked to an internal locus of control, we would expect people to become more internal. This suggests that LOC is not a valid explanation of how people resist social influence.
